Draft Chehalis Basin Watershed Management Plan

Note to Reader:

Numbered recommendations supported during the October 31, and/or November 21, 2003 Partnership meetings are in bold text.

Numbered recommendations that are unresolved are italicized.

Words being removed are shown as strikeouts

-

• SUGGESTED Format for Revised Chehalis Basin Watershed Plan
• Section I. Executive Summary
• Section II-Why do we Need a Plan for Chehalis River Basin Water Resources?
  • Cost effective water resource protection:
  • Insufficient water for out of stream uses:
  • Insufficient water for instream flows and fish runs
  • Recovery of degraded water quality:
• Section III- Watersheds and Plan Development "101"
  • What is a watershed?
  • What is a Water Resources Inventory Area (WRIA)?
  • To Plan or not to Plan?
  • Why develop a Plan on a Watershed Scale?
  • How Do You Initiate a Planning Process?
  • What is the Chehalis Basin Watershed Management Plan?
  • How did the Partnership go about developing the Plan?
• Section IV- Issue Statement, Recommendations and Suggestions Actions
  • Water Quantity
    • Subsection: Hydraulic Continuity
  • Water Quantity
    • Subsection: Water Rights
  • Water Quality
  • Habitat
  • Instream Flows
  • Water Quantity
    • Subsection: Exempt Wells
  • Water Quantity
    • Subsection Water Conservation
• Section V/Appendices - The CBP has yet to decide upon the following suggested actions:
  • Water Quantity
    • Subsection: Water Rights
  • Water Quality
  • Habitat
  • Instream Flows
  • Water Quantity
    • Subsection: Exempt Wells
  • Water Quantity
    • Subsection Water Conservation
• Footnotes

Cost effective water resource protection:

Many things are going right for Chehalis Basin water resources. This is primarily because the basin has extensive forestlands, relatively high precipitation, and a relatively low population. Forestlands are an important asset from a water resource perspective because well managed forestry as a land use provides favorable conditions for water quality and water resource integrity.

The future for water resources in the Chehalis Basin may not be as bright. Current land use planning forecasts indicate an increase in basin population of about 80,000 people by 2025. This would be an increase of more than 50 percent over the current population of about 140,000. The period between now and 2025 is likely to be only the beginning of major population growth. The area between Seattle and Vancouver (WA) now has about 6 million people. At current rates of migration and growth, this could grow to about 24 million by 2100. ³

Due to its location at approximately the mid-point between Seattle and Vancouver, the Chehalis Basin may be spared much of the development pressure that would result from regional population quadrupling, but it certainly would experience some pressure. This can already be seen by examining land use in the most desirable areas of the basin - those that are low lying and close to important water resources. About 87 percent of the basin as a whole is in forestry and only 11 percent in agriculture, urban, or industrial uses. However, these three uses climb to 42 percent in those areas within one mile of the developed segments of major Chehalis Basin rivers. ⁴ These segments account for almost half the length of the major rivers in the basin.

The existence of areas of high quality waters is both an environmental and an economic benefit to the Chehalis Basin because it is much easier and less costly to protect high quality water resources than to restore those that are degraded. If effective programs to protect water resources in the basin are not put into place soon, population pressure and economic growth will cause these waters to deteriorate over the long term. If that occurs, the choice that future generations will inherit will be either to expend huge sums on recovery or to live with degraded water resources.

This plan can be the vehicle for designing and establishing programs to protect our water resources while they are still in good shape. This is the cost effective way to manage.

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Insufficient water for out of stream uses:

Many people rely on the Chehalis River, its tributaries, and groundwater to supply their drinking water needs, as well as provide water for agriculture, fish hatcheries, and industry. These are the largest "out-of-stream" water uses. "In-stream" water uses, such as fish and wildlife needs within the river also rely on Chehalis Basin water; these needs are discussed in a later section.

Most out-of-stream water uses require a water right, but new permits have been nearly impossible to get for about the last ten years, especially within the upper Chehalis Basin. The reason is that the Department of Ecology (the regulatory agency that oversees water rights) suspects that there may not be enough water in the Chehalis Basin at certain times of the year to approve new water rights without hurting in-stream water needs or impairing senior water rights.

There are numerous considerations in evaluating the needs of out-of-stream water users. Inadequate information also makes the determination difficult:

• Because there are no significant areas of snow pack in upper watersheds, all streams in the basin depend almost entirely on groundwater storage of winter rainfall to maintain flows during the summer months.
• Groundwater is in close connection with surface water throughout the Basin; this means that groundwater withdrawals impact streamflow.
• The actual quantity of water that has legally been appropriated is impossible to quantify without an adjudication of water rights, because of the large number of unvalidated water right claims (8,418).
• Very few water users monitor, or meter, their water use, which makes it difficult to know how much water is actually used. Also, the timing of water use is rarely monitored or coordinated among users, making it more difficult to evaluate the impact of out-of-stream water uses on the river system.

This watershed plan must provide tools to determine whether water is available for additional out-of-stream uses in parts of the basin. It should provide an approach, method, and/or criteria for evaluating whether additional water is available for out-of-stream use. For areas where it is determined, that additional water is not available for out-of-stream uses, but additional out-of-stream needs exist or are projected, a plan for meeting those needs should be developed, with specific tools that are available to meet the need. To accomplish this, it is expected that modifications to existing state rules, regulations, and policies may be necessary.

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Insufficient water for instream flows and fish runs

Throughout the years land use practices in the Chehalis Basin influenced the aquatic habitats utilized by native salmonid fish species. As documented in the Limiting Factors Analysis Report ⁵ , most of the subbasins within WRIAs 22 and 23 have many of the same habitat impacts. We have the ability to directly improve and/or maintain the current condition(s).

There are 31 salmonid stocks in the basin. Of these 8 ⁶ are known to be depressed and the status of 7 other stocks is unknown. Bull trout in the Chehalis Basin is listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA); although the distribution, abundance, and suitable habitat of Bull trout in the basin have not been determined. As of October 2003, a bull trout recovery plan and critical habitat designation is being developed for the Washington Coast including the Chehalis Basin. Coho Salmon in the Chehalis Basin is a candidate species for listing under the ESA.

There is no coordinated Chehalis Basin salmon recovery strategy that addresses the major factors (habitat, harvest, hydropower, and hatcheries) generally thought to effect salmon abundance. But there are a number of actions under way. One is the Chehalis Basin Salmon Habitat Restoration and Preservation Work Plan, developed by federal, state, county, and tribal entities and citizens with Grays Harbor County in the Lead Entity role. Another is co-management of fish harvest by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Fish Program and the Quinault Indian Nation. A third process involves federal agencies working to prevent listings of candidate and at-risk fish species.

One aspect of salmon recovery that is specific to this plan is to try and make sure that the habitat that fish use is as good as we humans can make it. In addition to habitat restoration projects, such as removing barrier culverts, riparian restoration, and many others, improving habitat includes trying to make sure that enough water remains in streams so that salmon can migrate, spawn, and rear. At present, low summer flows coupled with habitat degradation, are the critical factors limiting the size of fish populations in nearly all Chehalis Basin streams. ⁷ Information from the Department of Ecology suggests a cause-and-effect relationship between consumptive water use and reduced stream flow. ⁸

This watershed plan is needed to understand and address the adverse effects of low flows on fish abundance. The instream flow portion of the plan is an attempt to determine what flows are most beneficial for fish and how to attain these flows, while balancing other instream uses. This plan envisions that through enhancing and protecting salmonid habitat (including stream flows) salmon recovery will move one step further forward.

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Recovery of degraded water quality:

The quality of water in the rivers and streams that make up the Chehalis Basin varies from excellent to poor. Generally, higher quality waters are found in the uppermost portions of tributaries to the Chehalis River where there tends to be little development or disturbance. Lower quality waters are generally found in the larger tributaries, the Chehalis River and Grays Harbor. These generalizations can be misleading however, because there are only four fresh water stations where the state monitors water quality on a regular (monthly) basis. Three of those stations are on the Chehalis River and one is on the Humptulips River. Targeted water quality studies and monitoring by organizations other than the state help fill in the gaps in our knowledge about the status of water quality. However, it is not unfair to say that we may be aware of where water quality problems exist because that is wherewe have looked. -

Water quality fails to meet state water quality standards due to: high levels of fecal coliform bacteria, warm water temperatures, low levels of dissolved oxygen, high pH, high levels of phosphorous, and pesticides. In some cases, failure to meet state water quality standards is due to natural conditions however, most of these problems can be traced to how humans use the land.

Under the federal Clean Water Act, emphasis tends to be placed on cleaning up waters that do not meet state water quality standards. Preventing the degradation of water quality can be both cheaper and less painful than cleaning up water once it has been degraded.

This watershed plan can benefit local communities by developing strategies for tracking water quality and methods for intervening to correct pollution problems/sources before water quality declines to the point that the state must initiate corrective action. These strategies will require local commitment, but that will be balanced by more local control over the types of corrective actions that are implemented. Protection against land use changes that will undermine water resources:

Land use is a major determinant of the quality of water resources. The Chehalis Basin is predominantly in forestlands, and that is an advantage from a water resource perspective. Forestry is the land use that provides the best water resources and urban areas the worst. In terms of land use and water resources, a rough continuum from good to poor is probably forest, agricultural, rural residential, suburban, urban.

Economic and population pressures tend to promote land use changes from forestry and agriculture to more intensive uses. There are strategies and policy options, provided by planning efforts such as the Washington Forest Practices Act ⁹ and others to encourage preservation of forest and agricultural land, to manage all types of land use for water resource quality, and to provide protection to water resources even as land uses change.

This plan is needed to raise awareness of the connection between land use and water resource quality, to promote preservation of forest and agricultural lands, and to encourage adoption of best management practices that protect water quality for all types of land use. If these things are done, we will have a better chance of meeting our goals for both economic growth and water resource integrity. Insufficient information for management:

Relatively little is known about water resources in the basin. Absent information includes knowledge of which existing rights are actually being used and which are extinct, what percentage of the water authorized by active rights is actually being withdrawn, how many of the approximately 8500 claims are valid, what the actual flows are in most Chehalis streams, whether actual and regulatory flows are adequate for fish and other instream uses, the extent to which exempt wells impair other rights - this list could be expanded.

If there were plenty of water in the basin for everyone and every use (instream and out-of-stream) the absence of information about basin water resources and their use would matter little. However, this is not the case in every part of the basin. Some subbasins are closed to the issuance of new rights, and some agencies and citizens do not believe that instream flows are adequate for fish. So far, concerns over these issues remain at a low level, but as the basin population and economy continue to grow, conflict over water inevitably will intensify.

It is not certain that there is enough water in the basin to meet all potential future demands for it. It is certain, however, that we will have the best chance to meet the most needs if we have a flexible and efficient system of water management in the basin. Such a system cannot be implemented with the significant information deficiencies that now exist.

Collecting information on water resources is expensive and time consuming. If we wait until the crunch comes, it will be too late to gather the information that is needed for optimal management, and some instream and out-of-stream uses that could otherwise be satisfied will be denied. This plan is needed to identify information needed for managing our waters and to begin assembling that information. If these things are done, there is hope that we will put our best foot forward in the future when pressures on basin water resources become more intense than they are today.

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Section III- Watersheds and Plan Development "101"

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

What is a watershed?

A watershed is the entire area that drains to a common waterway, such as a lake, river, or even the ocean. The Chehalis Basin includes all the lands that drain to the Chehalis River and its many tributaries. It is the largest watershed in western Washington.

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

What is a Water Resources Inventory Area (WRIA)?

A Water Resource Inventory Area or WRIA is a Washington State designation for a large watershed that drains to a common water body. There are 62 WRIAs in the state. Their purpose is to facilitate water-re-source planning. The upper Chehalis (WRIA 23) and the lower Chehalis (WRIA 22) have been combined Into a single planning area - the Chehalis Basin - for watershed planning purposes.

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

To Plan or not to Plan?

Planning processes generally address problems or may seek to protect or improve quality of life. Watershed planning is no different. Some watershed planning groups convene to address chronic problems like degrading fisheries, while others seek to address acute problems like heavy erosion along stream banks. Other planning efforts may bring together citizen groups, local agencies and states to work together on plans for community and environmental improvements. The degree of success achieved in watershed planning often depends on people devoting substantial time to the effort.

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Why develop a Plan on a Watershed Scale?

Watersheds encompass natural hydrology and represent a logical basis for managing water resources. Through this approach, the resource becomes the focal point, and the managers are able to gain a more complete understanding of overall conditions in an area and the stressors, which affect those conditions. This approach also encourages collaboration between political boundaries that do not exist traditionally.

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

How Do You Initiate a Planning Process?

Before watershed planning can begin, a local partnership must be assembled. In this situation the Chehalis Basin Partnership formed. Membership should include concerned individuals, local agencies and organizations who have a stake in the condition of their watershed.

Partnerships are key to effective watershed planning and management. Through a partnership, different people and organizations work together to address common interests and concerns. Partnerships vary with size, complexity, funding, supporting organization(s), strength of government agency participation, and skill mix, among other things. Developing a watershed management plan is not easy, but a partnership increases the likelihood for success because key parties are involved. Who makes up the Chehalis Basin Partnership and why did the group develop a Watershed Management Plan for the Chehalis Basin?

The Chehalis Basin Partnership (Partnership) is an organization that was formally established in August 1998 to undertake watershed planning. ¹⁰ The Partnership is broad-based; it includes representatives from four counties, two tribes, 12 cities, two water supply utilities, four state agencies, the Port of Centralia, major interests (including agriculture, business, environmental, fisheries, and forestry), and a citizen-at-large from each of the four counties. Several state and federal agencies are also active in Chehalis basin planning to provide resources and technical assistance. Using funding the Washington State Legislature made available, the Partnership voluntarily undertook watershed planning to exercise more local control over the water resources of the Chehalis Basin. ¹¹

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

What is the Chehalis Basin Watershed Management Plan?

The Chehalis Basin Watershed Management Plan is many things at once.

• It presents a vision for our future that was collaboratively developed by local governments, tribes, interested groups and citizens.
• It recommends water-resource policies and practices that are designed to support economic growth and to promote water availability and water quality now and in the future.
• It reflects our community's preference for voluntary, cooperative, proactive and cost-effective approaches rather than new government regulations.
• It serves as a roadmap for how to achieve our vision of sustainable, viable and healthy communities and habitat conditions necessary for native fish, for current and future generations.
• It is a source of valuable information - much of it new -- about the water resources our communities depend on, both on the local level and basin-wide.

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

How did the Partnership go about developing the Plan?

The process for developing the Plan included the following elements:

• Identifying water resource issues and problems from citizens, stakeholders, the Partnership and Partnership staff related to water quantity and quality, instream flows, habitat, flooding and water storage;
• Collecting existing information and developing new information about water resource issues where there were gaps;
• Identifying and analyzing options for addressing issues and concerns;
• Reaching agreement on recommendations - with a preference for voluntary, cooperative, proactive

Resources:

Introduction to Watershed Planning; http://www.epa.gov/watertrain/planning/

Why Watersheds? http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/why.html

Draft Chehalis Basin Watershed Management Plan Citizen Guide, September 26, 2003

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Section IV- Issue Statement, Recommendations and Suggestions Actions

Needs introductory language that includes reference to availability of funding-LN This Plan provides a vision and framework for water resource management in the Chehalis basin. At this time in Plan development, details of implementation obligations are undecided. These obligations will depend in large measure on the availability of funding, staff resources, technical capacity, and priorities of the entities involved and of the recommendation priorities of the Plan. One option for the Partnership is to consider some of these questions during the development of a Phase 4 detailed implementation plan, if the Partnership chooses to undertake this effort.

Still, the following recommendations reflect some of the Partnership's desire and vision and address important, even vital issues related to water resources. The success of this Plan depends in large measure on the actions taken to implement the recommendations, and the Partnership encourages action on recommendations when and where resources exist.

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Water Quantity

-

Subsection: Hydraulic Continuity

1.13 Conduct a groundwater study that provides the information necessary to address the hydraulic continuity issue. This study would provide specific information about the character of the groundwater throughout the Chehalis basin that would allow decision-makers to better evaluate whether:

• Will a A n individual water right application would impact stream flows?
• Could a A strategic groundwater pumping groundwater-pumping schedule could be developed for a particular site that would delay the impact on the river until the high flow period?

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Water Quantity

-

Subsection: Water Rights

1.2 - Address requirements of Phase 4 watershed planning related to municipal water rights by estimating quantity of water represented by inchoate rights. Suggested new wording from Governor's Salmon Recovery Office: Address requirements of Phase 4 watershed planning related to municipal water rights by estimating quantity of water represented by inchoate rights and by clarifying how such rights can be reconciled with protecting instream flow needs and can be affected by water conservation programs."

1.3 - Regional Water Supply, or coordinated water system planning.

1.4 - Unresolved Allow out-of-kind mitigation (watershed mitigation) for new or changed water rights, e.g. using base-flow restoration as mitigation for new right

1.5 - Unresolved Request a streamlined adjudication for the Chehalis Basin The Tribes and Ecology agreed to meet, discuss and develop language as a recommendation to the legislature regarding options for flexibility in streamlining adjudication OR alternatives that would determine validity of claims without adjudication.

Note to CBP: As a reminder of past discussions, the CBP might want to consider including a brief description of the comments that have been made on unresolved actions. The CBP thought this was a good idea, however concerns were expressed regarding the amount of time necessary to complete this task. Jennings volunteered to help draft summary statements as long as other members of the group provided their comments. This section would be called "Statements of concern". Here is a sample of what that might resemble for action 1.5:

a) - Ecology is responsible for protecting senior water rights and water dependant in-stream resources. There is a tremendous amount of uncertainty about how much water is really available in the Chehalis Basin because there are over 2500 water rights and certificates; over 8,000 claims; in-stream flows at Porter are not met an average of 77 days per year and "paper" water rights for August exceed river flow at Porter by 270%. Adjudication will not necessarily result in water being available for appropriation, but without adjudication (or a process that has the same outcome) it is unlikely that Ecology can make a positive finding that water is available for pending water right applications.

b) - Adjudication is time consuming, expensive and would be divisive; the Chehalis Tribe is concerned about adjudicating federally reserved rights in state court under the McCarran Amendment.

1.6 - Unresolved Establish a water master program

1.7 - Recommend adequate funding level for water resources management (source to be determined; funding to be distributed to those entities involved in water resources management).

1.8 - Continue to collect data pertaining to water resources.

1.9 - Unresolved Increased enforcement of existing laws and regulations to support voluntary efforts.

1.10 - Unresolved Investigate the magnitude of impact from exempt wells.

1.11 - Develop and implement water conservation programs.

1.12 - Develop a toolbox for municipal water purveyors (see Municipal Supply Issue Paper page ) to assist them in meeting their water supply responsibilities while also contributing to protection of instream base-flows.

1.13 - New suggested action- Initiate a detailed assessment of water claims in the Chehalis Basin to attain an initial idea as to their validity. This assessment would expand upon and supplement the information collected under RCW 90.82.070.

1.14 - New suggested action-Map water rights in the Chehalis Basin.

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

To be included in the issue paper only

SIDEBAR: "Toolbox for Cities to Address Water Right Water Right & Stream flow Issues

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

(See "Municipal Supply" Issue Paper for more information)"

a. - Water conservation programs

b. - Transfer of surface water rights to ground water rights

c. - Implementation of a water master program

d. - Use of interruptible water rights for a portion of water supply

e. - Water conservation programs f. - Water rights trust program

g. - Integration of the use of reclaimed water

h. - Encouraging a return of water to the rivers and streams Implementation of water storage projects to serve municipal water supply needs without impacting instream flows

i. - Watershed mitigation

j. - Regional water supply or coordinated water system planning

k. - Connecting water supply planning to growth management or comprehensive planning

l. - Pay to have Ecology hire a consultant to process their water right, along with every application ahead of them in the same water source (risk: even after paying the decision may be a denial)

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Water Quality

2.1 - Protect healthy waters of the basin so they do not become impaired or need TMDLs.

2.2 - Not agreed to yet: Implement the basin-wide water quality monitoring program developed as part of this planning process . , including hiring a water quality monitoring coordinator. 2.3 - Develop a program to clean up water quality impairments before TMDLs need to be implemented.

2.4 - Develop programs to address nonpoint sources of pollution in the Chehalis Basin so there can be a more equitable system for improving water quality.

2.5 - Propose a "package" of improvements to the State to address nonpoint pollution (not a single approach).

2.6 - Not agreed to yet: Unresolved Develop approaches to keep forestry and agriculture on the land. This will reduce future impairments caused by more intensive forms of land use.

2.7 - Not agreed to yet: Unresolved Develop standards for "reasonable assurance" for nonpoint source reduction so local communities know what the standard is if they want to produce programs that will take the pressure off of point sources.

2.8 - Not agreed to yet: Unresolved Set up a regional water quality board to manage water to prevent future TMDLs.

2.9 - Not agreed to yet: Unresolved Look at opportunities for pollution trading in the Chehalis Basin.

2.10 - Develop sources for funding water quality improvements.

2.11 - Not agreed to yet (suggested new wording from Lewis County Farm Bureau): Control or eliminate non-native problem weeds and use extreme care not to introduce problem species. Alternate wording as suggested by USFWS: Prevent the introduction and/or eliminate aquatic non-native invasive species from the riparian area and water bodies. Suggested wording provided by Department of Agriculture designed to succeed the above text. Prevent the introduction of detrimental plant and animal species (aquatic and terrestrial) and control or eliminate species designated by the state or county as noxious, invasive, quarantined, or nuisance species. Source: http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/weed_list/prohibited.html

2.12 - Develop and distribute public information on inspection and care of septic systems.

2.13 - Develop a prioritized list of TMDL projects where 303d impairment listings already exist.

2.14 - Not agreed to yet: Unresolved The implications of the change from class-based water quality standards to use-based standards should be evaluated and the potential for conducting a use attainability analysis should be explored. Recommend that the Department of Ecology adopt "use-based" water quality standards for the Chehalis River basin . The CBP's Water Quality Committee should further explore the option of moving from "class base" to "use base" standards. Further definition of what this means and the implications should also be pursued by the Water Quality Committee .

2.15 - Not agreed to yet: Unresolved Reject the status quo approach because it does not provide sufficient focus on the protection of high quality waters, and reject the additional regulatory approach as inconsistent with the Partnership's goals and objectives, too costly, lacking in public acceptance, inconsistent with Ecology's current revision of their anti-degradation policy, and politically unrealistic.

2.16 - Not agreed to yet: Unresolved Implement the proactive voluntary approach outlined above in Alternatives and as discussed further below.

2.17 - Not agreed to yet: Unresolved Create an inventory of high quality waters -- we must know where such waters are located if we are to be able to protect them.

2.18 - Determine which governmental entities (local, state or federal) are best able and willing responsible for and best able to provide the required protection for identified high quality waters.

2.19 - Expand the scope of Partnership Water Quality Committee to add a "Good Water Initiative." The Water Quality Committee would be an ideal group to assist in developing and carrying out such an initiative.

2.20 - Not agreed to yet: Unresolved Raise public consciousness regarding the importance of protecting high quality waters, and to increase its priority among governments at all levels (local, state, and federal).

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Habitat

3.1 - Develop a better communication and coordination structure among the various groups involved in habitat restoration within the Chehalis basin

3.2 - The Chehalis Basin Partnership will be instrumental in the creation a local organization capable of planning, coordinating, and implementing local habitat restoration efforts in WRIA's 22 and 23.

3.3 - Support implementation of a coordinated habitat restoration strategy (e.g., Chehalis Basin Plan for Habitat Restoration). And as suggested by Governor's Salmon Recovery Office: Rely upon implementation of the habitat restoration strategy as developed by the Chehalis Basin Partnership, the lead entity under RCW 77.85, as the primary habitat restoration strategy for the Chehalis Basin. This should also allow for the incorporation of other relevant species plans as they evolve. single habitat restoration strategy for the Chehalis Basin. Chad, Brian P, Doug, Lonnie and Lee N. agreed to work further to reach an agreement on this recommendation.

3.4 - Develop a data, inventory and monitoring strategy for determining how effective habitat enhancement efforts have been

3.5 - Inform the public about how they can best protect habitat on their own land

3.6 - Identify or create a funding source for small habitat projects

3.7 - New (from USFWS), not agreed to yet: Unresolved Identify applicable funding sources for habitat protection and restoration projects.

3.8 - New (from WDFW), not agreed to yet: Unresolved Explore the need to develop a Salmonid Plan. This plan would be similar to the recovery plans being developed elsewhere in the state, in areas with ESA listings. The intent of the plan would be to keep the stocks within the basin from becoming listed.

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Instream Flows

4.1 - Current regulatory flows should be retained; the Partnership wishes to preserve the 1976 priority date for those flow levels.

4.2 - Not agreed to yet: Unresolved After analysis of new and existing information (see #5 below), the Partnership will consider recommending flow levels for streams with no regulatory minimums or adding incremental flows to existing regulatory minimums. Any new recommendations adopted by the State that are higher would carry a 1998 priority date for the additional flow increment.

4.3 - Not agreed to yet: Unresolved Request that WDFW/Ecology, in consultation w/tribes and Partnership members, recommend instream flow levels for all control stations [added language from WDFW]: if funding permits. In addition to current stream hydrology and IFIM results, both the historic, "natural" stream flow level and flow levels less than 100% Weighted Usable Area (WUA) for fish should be considered. Those agencies should consider the strategy of dry-year and wet-year flow numbers, as well as the possibility of "target" flows.

4.4 - Not agreed to yet (First reference to pre-European flows removed; second reference left for informational purposes: The Partnership adopts the following philosophy (possibly as an expansion of its existing mission, goals and objectives) for how to approach setting stream flow levels:

• Recommended new regulatory minimum instream flows in the Chehalis Basin should represent flows that provide a healthy environment for fish and other aquatic life (related to flow conditions) and that are hydrologically achievable. Definitions for the two components in this statement (healthy environment for fish, and pre-European hydrologically achievable flows) need to be formulated.
• Based on Tribal, or federally-reserved, water rights, the Chehalis Tribe and Quinault Nation retain an instream flow right necessary to protect fishing and hunting rights. The tribal right to instream flows will likely be adjudicated or settled using the IFIM methodology.
• New wording from USFWS: Provide adequate instream flows (both minimum and flood) to maintain healthy populations of salmonids and other aquatic species, and also to restore those species that are depressed or already on the endangered species list.
• These flows should be measured and monitored. The results will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the program and make necessary adjustments.
• A focus should be placed on gauging and increasing summer-time flows into the streams and rivers of the basin. Questions to consider (documented responses from agencies/tribes would be beneficial):
  • o What is a healthy environment for fish?
  • o What flows are hydrologically achievable to meet the needs of people and fish?
  • o What flows occurred prior to European settlement?
• Enforcement of existing laws, rules and regulations would assist greatly in achieving flow levels that are adequate for fish and people.

4.5 Not agreed to yet: Unresolved In the implementation stages of the watershed planning process, the Partnership will consider recommending flow levels for streams with no regulatory minimums, or adding incremental flows to existing regulatory minimums, using information from the following:

• Partnership goals and objectives and the above instream flow philosophy
• Existing flow data
• Out-of-stream uses
• IFIM flow study results
• Estimates of pre-European flows
• Recommendations from Ecology/WDFW, in consultation with tribes
• Possible strategy of dry-year and wet-year flow numbers

4.6 - Not agreed to yet: Unresolved Ecology/EPA/USGS should monitor flows at all sites

4.7 - Not agreed to yet: Unresolved The Chehalis Basin Partnership prefers voluntary approaches to regulatory in attempts to make water available for stream flows.

4.8 - Not agreed to yet: Unresolved An important focus of watershed plan recommendations and implementation should be to make more water available for instream uses, especially in the time period from roughly April through October (most important are the months from July through October)

4.9 - Not agreed to yet: Unresolved The new flows that should be established by rule will be specified when information becomes available.

4.10 - Not agreed to yet: Unresolved The Partnership may recommend that Ecology close certain basins from further surface water withdrawals at certain times during the year. The Partnership does desire, however, that water rights be issued for groundwater applications if the applicant can show that their withdrawals would not impact stream flows from August through October, through timing or consumptive use.

4.11 New suggested action-Current regulatory flows should be retained; the CBP wishes to preserve the 1976 priority dates for those flow levels. Previously stated in 4.1(STC)

4.12 New suggested action-A work group representing basin-wide interests and agencies will convene to oversee the scientific studies, and to develop and conduct the public process to recommend instream flow levels for the Chehalis Basin.

4.13 Monitor s New unresolved language-Streamflows at each of the 31 sites, where minimum flows were established in regulation in 1976, should be regularly monitored to determine if the flows are being met . Should this be part of 4.6? (STC)

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Water Quantity

-

Subsection: Exempt Wells

• The Partnership believes that exempt wells may be a problem in specific sub-basins of the Chehalis basin where rural development and/or hydro-geologic and/or stream flow conditions create cause for concern.
• The Partnership further believes that exempt wells may be a potential future problem in other sub-basins where future rural development, combined with existing hydro-geologic and/or existing or future stream flow conditions, may create cause for concern.

Statewide:

9.1 - Not Agreed to Yet: Unresolved Maintain status quo, until steps below are taken

9.2 - Not Agreed to Yet: Unresolved Legislature/Ecology should address exempt well use on a statewide basis following existing laws, rules & opinions

9.3 - State should enforce current regulations

9.4 - Evaluate current regulations on exempt wells for adequacy in protecting surface waters (quantity and quality)

9.5 - Clarify science around impacts of exempt wells on surface water

9.6 - Not Agreed to Yet: Unresolved State must allocate resources if local governments are to help manage exempt well use

9.7 - Not Agreed to Yet: Unresolved Ecology should conduct statewide evaluation of exempt well use, using the following guidelines:

• Ecology should conduct its evaluation in an open process involving stakeholders.
• Ecology should sponsor sub-regional and regional workshops on exempt wells, leading to a statewide workshop/ forum/ task force on exempt wells to better quantify technical aspects and to identify policy and cost factors.
• Ecology should develop an educational program related to the use of exempt wells and their potential impact on instream flows and water quality.
• Ecology should develop criteria for when it will require use of deeper aquifers as a source of exempt well water. If deeper aquifers are used for household use, shallow aquifers would be available to supplement stream flows.

9.8 - Not Agreed to Yet: Unresolved The Department of Health should prepare a white paper that compares use of exempt wells per parcel to the use of community systems (Class B). In particular, it should address the benefits that Class B community systems have for water quality.

9.9 - The Partnership believes that a conflict exists among the 1945 Groundwater Law, the Attorney General's opinion, and the Chehalis Instream Resource Protection Program (IRPP) as to whether small withdrawals can affect surface water rights and whether they are subject to the same system of priorities as all other appropriators. The Partnership recommends that Ecology or the Attorney General's office address this conflict in the Chehalis basin.

9.10 - Not Agreed to Yet: Unresolved The Partnership has discussed exempt wells and its members have widely divergent opinions on whether or not exempt wells are a concern in the Chehalis basin. Some believe that exempt wells have minimal impact while others believe that exempt wells have, or will have, an impact, especially on stream flows. Based on the data evaluation that shows that there may be concerns with exempt wells in certain sub-basins, the Partnership has agreed to recommend the following specific statement and actions regarding exempt wells in the Chehalis basin: Statement of Concern Related to Exempt Wells in the Chehalis basin: 1. The Partnership believes that exempt wells may be a problem in specific sub-basins of the Chehalis basin where rural development and/or hydro-geologic and/or stream flow conditions create cause for concern. 1. The Partnership further believes that exempt wells may be a potential future problem in other sub-basins where future rural development, combined with existing hydro-geologic and/or existing or future stream flow conditions, may create cause for concern. Recommended Actions Related to Exempt Wells in the Chehalis basin ú Prioritize sub-basins in the Chehalis Basin based on concerns about exempt wells and conduct specific hydro-geologic studies and evaluations to identify specific problem areas. Areas of higher concern are those that have substantial human development now or projected in the future, poor hydro-geological conditions and/or hydraulic continuity, or low stream flows ú Pursue funding sources for investigating possible solutions for identified sub-basin problem areas in order to: o Focus on these sub-basins and areas within these sub-basins in developing alternative options for exempt wells, for example, providing water purveyor service, using deep aquifers where supplemental water may improve stream flow conditions, and/or considering means to influence the timing of withdrawals to benefit stream flows. o - Develop educational materials and program for informing basin/state residents, agriculture and businesses on how to use exempt wells and to lessen their impact on the environment. Specific to Chehalis Basin: The Partnership adopts the following statement of concern related to exempt wells:

9.11 Not agreed to yet: Unresolved Exempt wells may presently be a problem in specific sub-basins of the Chehalis Basin where rural development and/or hydro-geologic and/or stream flow conditions create cause for concern. Also, exempt wells may be a potential future problem in other sub-basins where future rural development combined with existing hydro-geologic and/or existing or future stream flow conditions may create cause for concern

9.12 Prioritize sub-basins based on concerns about exempt wells and conduct specific hydro-geologic studies and evaluations to identify specific problem areas. Areas of higher concern are those that have substantial human development now or projected in the future, poor hydro-geological conditions and/or hydraulic continuity, or low stream flows

9.13 Pursue funding sources for investigating possible solutions for identified sub-basin problem areas in order to:

• Focus on these sub-basins & areas within these sub-basins in developing alternative options for exempt wells, for example providing water purveyor service, using deep aquifers where supplemental water may improve stream flow conditions, and/or considering means to influence the timing of withdrawals to benefit stream flows
• Develop educational materials and program for informing basin/state residents, agriculture and businesses on how to use exempt wells and to lessen their impact on the environment

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Water Quantity

-

Subsection Water Conservation

Issue statement : Water conservation is required and is a way of saving water for existing and future human, agriculture, and fish needs.

Recommendation : The CBP recommends in a general sense that water conservation be promoted, encouraged and supported. The CBP recommends specifically that the following suggested actions be considered and evaluated in promoting water conservation.

Suggested actions: The following are the methods or processes required in total or in some combination to achieve the recommendations of the CBP.

17.1 - Not Agreed to Yet: Unresolved Meet Phase 4 requirements for conservation, if Phase 4 funding is accepted.

17.2 - The Partnership should meet with water purveyors to develop coordinated water conservation efforts that benefit all purveyors of the Chehalis Basin. Such an effort would provide an economy of scale by pooling purveyor resources and ideas into a regional approach.

17.3 - Provide opportunities between the CBP and the agricultural community to consider cooperative efforts to simultaneously support agriculture & stream flows. This could lead to a coordinated effort involving Farm Bureaus, Conservation Districts, the Washington State Department of Agriculture and/or individual members of the agricultural community, including a resource for technological information.

17.4 - Not Agreed to Yet: Unresolved The current "use it or lose it" law is a disincentive to conserve water for agriculture. Therefore, the CBP recommends considering a management system to allow the agricultural community to combine resources and "share" water rights to become more efficient.

17.5 - Not Agreed to Yet: Unresolved The Partnership should consider recommending a "Water Master" who could work with Conservation Districts or irrigators to use water efficiently and minimize impacts on stream flows.

17.6 - Not Agreed to Yet: Unresolved Recommend changes to the state's "use it or lose it" law to allow saving water without losing water rights.

17.7 - Encourage consideration of the Trust Water Rights Program as a method to preserve water rights and allow water to go to the streams.

17.8 - Water purveyors continue to comply with DOH requirements. Consider methods to measure success of water purveyors' current conservation efforts to see if adjustments are needed. Consider state funding to support purveyor conservation efforts.

17.9 New suggested language from the STC- In those counties that have adopted local policies protecting water supply in agriculture designated lands:

• Adequate water supply should be retained on and provided to designated agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and other important agricultural areas; and
• Ecology should not grant permits for transfers of existing water rights from designated agricultural lands, unless long-term arrangements are made for a suitable surrogate water supply to maintain agricultural use.

Option A - regrouping the recommendations using Water Conservation as an example

Suggested actions: The following are the methods or processes required in total or in some combination to achieve the recommendations of the CBP.

The CBP agrees to the following suggested actions:

17.2 The Partnership should meet with water purveyors to develop coordinated water conservation efforts that benefit all purveyors of the Chehalis Basin. Such an effort would provide an economy of scale by pooling purveyor resources and ideas into a regional approach.

17.3 Provide opportunities between the CBP and the agricultural community to consider cooperative efforts to simultaneously support agriculture & stream flows. This could lead to a coordinated effort involving Farm Bureaus, Conservation Districts, the Washington State Department of Agriculture and/or individual members of the agricultural community, including a resource for technological information.

17.7 Encourage consideration of the Trust Water Rights Program as a method to preserve water rights and allow water to go to the streams.

17.8 Water purveyors continue to comply with DOH requirements. Consider methods to measure success of water purveyors' current conservation efforts to see if adjustments are needed. Consider state funding to support purveyor conservation efforts.

The CBP has yet to decide upon the following suggested actions:

17.1 Unresolved: Meet Phase 4 requirements for conservation, if Phase 4 funding is accepted.

17.4 Unresolved: The current "use it or lose it" law is a disincentive to conserve water for agriculture. Therefore, the CBP recommends considering a management system to allow the agricultural community to combine resources and "share" water rights to become more efficient.

17.5 Unresolved: The Partnership should consider recommending a "Water Master" who could work with Conservation Districts or irrigators to use water efficiently and minimize impacts on stream flows.

17.6 Unresolved: Recommend changes to the state's "use it or lose it" law to allow saving water without losing water rights.

Option B- regrouping the recommendations by removing the recommendation accepted by the CBP .

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Section V/Appendices - The CBP has yet to decide upon the following suggested actions:

The Partnership reviewed and discussed the recommendations introduced in the individual issue papers contained in Appendix . Due to the extensive list and ability to understand the implications of some issues the CBP decided to separate the issues into two categories: Watershed Management Plan Recommendations and issues agreed to by the Partnership and Recommendations and issues that remain unresolved. The CBP defines unresolved issues as issues that were outside of the planning parameters set by RCW 90.82 and/or issues that need further examination or coordination from stakeholders not currently engaged in the Partnership's activities.

The CBP intends to keep the recommendations and issues listed below "alive" to allow for further discussion.

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Water Quantity

-

Subsection: Water Rights

Issue statement : Given the number of water rights and claims in the Chehalis basin, it is apparent that a significant effort is necessary to identify, quantify, prioritize, and manage those water rights to protect senior water rights, better manage water for human and fish needs, and to track water.

Recommendation : The CBP recommends establishing a "toolbox" of alternative approaches for those seeking water supply, water rights data and tracking, and enforcement be evaluated and considered for the basin.

Suggested actions related to water rights: The following methods or processes may be required to achieve the recommendations of the CBP; however, the following issues remain to be addressed by the CBP during future work plans.

1.4 - Allow out-of-kind mitigation (watershed mitigation) for new or changed water rights, e.g. using base-flow restoration as mitigation for new right

1.5 - The Tribes and Ecology agreed to meet, discuss and develop language as a recommendation to the legislature regarding options for flexibility in streamlining adjudication OR alternatives that would determine validity of claims without adjudication.

1.6 - Establish a water master program

1.9 - Increased enforcement of existing laws and regulations to support voluntary efforts.

1.10 - Investigate the magnitude of impact from exempt wells.

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Water Quality

Issue statement : It is important to support and monitor high quality waters that presently exist in the basin and to evaluate the feasibility of establishing an overall water quality monitoring program.

Recommendation : A basin-wide water quality monitoring program is needed. The CBP recommends that further evaluation be made for implementing such a water quality monitoring program in the basin.

Suggested actions related to water quality: The following methods or processes may be required to achieve the recommendations of the CBP; however, the following issues remain to be addressed by the CBP during future work plans.

2.6 - Develop approaches to keep forestry and agriculture on the land. This will reduce future impairments caused by more intensive forms of land use.

2.7 - Develop standards for "reasonable assurance" for nonpoint source reduction so local communities know what the standard is if they want to produce programs that will take the pressure off of point sources.

2.8 - Set up a regional water quality board to manage water to prevent future TMDLs.

2.9 - Look at opportunities for pollution trading in the Chehalis Basin.

2.11 - Not agreed to yet (suggested new wording from Lewis County Farm Bureau): Control or eliminate non-native problem weeds and use extreme care not to introduce problem species. Alternate wording as suggested by USFWS: Prevent the introduction and/or eliminate aquatic non-native invasive species from the riparian area and water bodies. Suggested wording provided by Department of Agriculture designed to succeed the above text. Prevent the introduction of detrimental plant and animal species (aquatic and terrestrial) and control or eliminate species designated by the state or county as noxious, invasive, quarantined, or nuisance species. Source: http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/weed_list/prohibited.html

2.14 - The CBP's Water Quality Committee should further explore the option of moving from "class base" to "use base" standards. Further definition of what this means and the implications should also be pursued by the Water Quality Committee.

2.15 - Reject the status quo approach because it does not provide sufficient focus on the protection of high quality waters, and reject the additional regulatory approach as inconsistent with the Partnership's goals and objectives, too costly, lacking in public acceptance, inconsistent with Ecology's current revision of their anti-degradation policy, and politically unrealistic.

2.16 - Implement the proactive voluntary approach outlined above in Alternatives and as discussed further below.

2.17 - Create an inventory of high quality waters -- we must know where such waters are located if we are to be able to protect them.

2.20 - Raise public consciousness regarding the importance of protecting high quality waters, and to increase its priority among governments at all levels (local, state, and federal).

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Habitat

Issue statement : Over the last 150 years, human use of the Chehalis Basin and its resources has had unforeseen, often negative, impacts on the habitat that fish and wildlife need for survival. Today, restoration efforts are underway. However, these restoration efforts need more basin wide coordination to be efficient and effective at preserving and restoring habitat.

Recommendation : The CBP recommends exploring a range of approaches to improve communication, coordination and consolidation of all habitat efforts in the basin.

Suggested actions related to habitat : The following methods or processes may be required to achieve the recommendations of the CBP; however, the following issues remain to be addressed by the CBP during future work plans.

3.3 - Support implementation of a coordinated habitat restoration strategy (e.g., Chehalis Basin Plan for Habitat Restoration). And as suggested by Governor's Salmon Recovery Office: Rely upon implementation of the habitat restoration strategy as developed by the Chehalis Basin Partnership, the lead entity under RCW 77.85, as the primary habitat restoration strategy for the Chehalis Basin. This should also allow for the incorporation of other relevant species plans as they evolve. Chad, Brian P, Doug, Lonnie and Lee N. agreed to work further to reach an agreement on this recommendation.

3.7 New (from USFWS), Unresolved Identify applicable funding sources for habitat protection and restoration projects.

3.8 New (from WDFW), Unresolved Explore the need to develop a Salmonid Plan. This plan would be similar to the recovery plans being developed elsewhere in the state, in areas with ESA listings. The intent of the plan would be to keep the stocks within the basin from becoming listed.

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Instream Flows

Issue statement : Technical studies and data indicate that low flow conditions are a concern in many streams and rivers in the Chehalis Basin. Data, including data collected during the planning process, indicate that stream flows during the low-flow period (July through October) sometimes do not reach the regulatory flows set on 31 streams in the basin. Additional studies and data collection efforts are underway that should contribute to further evaluation of instream flows in the basin.

Recommendation : Minimum flows were established by regulation in 1976 for 31 sites within the Chehalis Basin; the adequacy of these flows needs to be evaluated. Scientific information needs to be obtained to recommend specific flows for specific sites within the Chehalis Basin.

Suggested actions related to instream flows: The following methods or processes may be required to achieve the recommendations of the CBP; however, the following issues remain to be addressed by the CBP during future work plans.

4.2 After analysis of new and existing information (see #5 below), the Partnership will consider recommending flow levels for streams with no regulatory minimums or adding incremental flows to existing regulatory minimums. Any new recommendations adopted by the State that are higher would carry a 1998 priority date for the additional flow increment.

4.3 Request that WDFW/Ecology, in consultation w/tribes and Partnership members, recommend instream flow levels for all control stations [added language from WDFW]: if funding permits. In addition to current stream hydrology and IFIM results, both the historic, "natural" stream flow level and flow levels less than 100% Weighted Usable Area (WUA) for fish should be considered. Those agencies should consider the strategy of dry-year and wet-year flow numbers, as well as the possibility of "target" flows.

4.4 (First reference to pre-European flows removed; second reference left for informational purposes: The Partnership adopts the following philosophy (possibly as an expansion of its existing mission, goals and objectives) for how to approach setting stream flow levels:

• Recommended new regulatory minimum instream flows in the Chehalis Basin should represent flows that provide a healthy environment for fish and other aquatic life (related to flow conditions) and that are hydrologically achievable. Definitions for the two components in this statement (healthy environment for fish, and pre-European hydrologically achievable flows) need to be formulated.
• Based on Tribal, or federally-reserved, water rights, the Chehalis Tribe and Quinault Nation retain an instream flow right necessary to protect fishing and hunting rights. The tribal right to instream flows will likely be adjudicated or settled using the IFIM methodology.
• New wording from USFWS: Provide adequate instream flows (both minimum and flood) to maintain healthy populations of salmonids and other aquatic species, and also to restore those species that are depressed or already on the endangered species list.
• These flows should be measured and monitored. The results will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the program and make necessary adjustments.
• A focus should be placed on gauging and increasing summer-time flows into the streams and rivers of the basin. Questions to consider (documented responses from agencies/tribes would be beneficial):

  o - - What is a healthy environment for fish?

  o - What flows are hydrologically achievable to meet the needs of people and fish?

  o - What flows occurred prior to European settlement?

• Enforcement of existing laws, rules and regulations would assist greatly in achieving flow levels that are adequate for fish and people.

4.5 In the implementation stages of the watershed planning process, the Partnership will consider recommending flow levels for streams with no regulatory minimums, or adding incremental flows to existing regulatory minimums, using information from the following:

• Partnership goals and objectives and the above instream flow philosophy
• Existing flow data
• Out-of-stream uses
• IFIM flow study results
• Estimates of pre-European flows
• Recommendations from Ecology/WDFW, in consultation with tribes
• Possible strategy of dry-year and wet-year flow numbers

4.6 - Ecology/EPA/USGS should monitor flows at all sites

4.7 - The Chehalis Basin Partnership prefers voluntary approaches tregulatory in attempts to make water available for stream flows.

4.8 - An important focus of watershed plan recommendations and implementation should be to make more water available for instream uses, especially in the time period from roughly April through October (most important are the months from July through October)

4.9 - The new flows that should be established by rule will be specified when information becomes available.

4.10 The Partnership may recommend that Ecology close certain basins from further surface water withdrawals at certain times during the year. The Partnership does desire, however, that water rights be issued for groundwater applications if the applicant can show that their withdrawals would not impact stream flows from August through October, through timing or consumptive use.

4.11 New suggested action-A work group representing basin-wide interests and agencies will convene to oversee the scientific studies, and to develop and conduct the public process to recommend instream flow levels for the Chehalis Basin.

4.12 New unresolved language-Streamflows at each of the 31 sites, where minimum flows were established in regulation in 1976, should be regularly monitored to determine if the flows are being met . Should this be part of 4.6? (STC)

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Water Quantity

-

Subsection: Exempt Wells

Issue statement : Exempt wells are critical for rural development in the Chehalis Basin. At the same time, there is some concern that exempt wells may impact stream flows now or in the future in specific sub-basins of the Chehalis Basin. It is also apparent that exempt wells are an unresolved issue across Washington State.

Statement of Concern Related to Exempt Wells in the Chehalis basin:

• The Partnership believes that exempt wells may be a problem in specific sub-basins of the Chehalis basin where rural development and/or hydro-geologic and/or stream flow conditions create cause for concern.
• The Partnership further believes that exempt wells may be a potential future problem in other sub-basins where future rural development, combined with existing hydro-geologic and/or existing or future stream flow conditions, may create cause for concern.

Recommendation : Because of these findings, the CBP recommends that further evaluation of exempt wells be conducted to assess their real impact statewide as well as in the Chehalis Basin as a whole and in specific sub-basins.

Suggested actions related to exempt wells: The following methods or processes may be required to achieve the recommendations of the CBP; however, the following issues remain to be addressed by the CBP during future work plan.

9.1 - Maintain status quo, until steps below are taken

9.2 - Legislature/Ecology should address exempt well use on a statewide basis following existing laws, rules & opinions

9.6 - State must allocate resources if local governments are to help manage exempt well use

9.7 - Ecology should conduct statewide evaluation of exempt well use, using the following guidelines:

• Ecology should conduct its evaluation in an open process involving stakeholders.
• Ecology should sponsor sub-regional and regional workshops on exempt wells, leading to a statewide workshop/ forum/ task force on exempt wells to better quantify technical aspects and to identify policy and cost factors.
• Ecology should develop an educational program related to the use of exempt wells and their potential impact on instream flows and water quality.
• Ecology should develop criteria for when it will require use of deeper aquifers as a source of exempt well water. If deeper aquifers are used for household use, shallow aquifers would be available to supplement stream flows.

9.8 - The Department of Health should prepare a white paper that compares use of exempt wells per parcel to the use of community systems (Class B). In particular, it should address the benefits that Class B community systems have for water quality.

9.10 The Partnership has discussed exempt wells and its members have widely divergent opinions on whether or not exempt wells are a concern in the Chehalis basin. Some believe that exempt wells have minimal impact while others believe that exempt wells have, or will have, an impact, especially on stream flows. Based on the data evaluation that shows that there may be concerns with exempt wells in certain sub-basins, the Partnership has agreed to recommend the following specific statement and actions regarding exempt wells in the Chehalis basin:

9.11 Exempt wells may presently be a problem in specific sub-basins of the Chehalis Basin where rural development and/or hydro-geologic and/or stream flow conditions create cause for concern. Also, exempt wells may be a potential future problem in other sub-basins where future rural development combined with existing hydro-geologic and/or existing or future stream flow conditions may create cause for concern

Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New

-

Water Quantity

-

Subsection Water Conservation

Issue statement : Water conservation is required and is a way of saving water for existing and future human, agriculture, and fish needs.

Recommendation : The CBP recommends in a general sense that water conservation be promoted, encouraged and supported. The CBP recommends specifically that the following suggested actions be considered and evaluated in promoting water conservation.

Suggested actions related to water conservation: The following methods or processes may be required to achieve the recommendations of the CBP; however, the following issues remain to be addressed by the CBP during future work plans.